Leaderboard

I packed spray for my cook tent in remote hunts. Weight and bulk weren't concerns (I use a off-road rig to get out there), and the thought was that it might work on a young, curious bear, negating the need to kill it. The social jury here in Alaska is that it might work on such bears, but that, too, depends on the bear. One friend has a bee hive on his deck (insanity where he lives up Eagle River valley). Sure enough, he got a bear on his deck, but instead of a thousand pound brown bear, it was a small black bear. He stepped out and shooed it away. In a few minutes it came back. He stepped out with the shotgun and fired a round into the air. It ran off, and in a few minutes it came back. He loaded a bean bag round in it and shot the bear on the fanny. It takes off............and in a half hour, is back. Finally, he puts it down with a slug. He calls the Troopers to report a DLP, and a Trooper shows up, throws it into the back of his pickup, and drives off. Didn't make my friend skin it out or even fill out the DLP report. Would spray have worked better? Dunno. Maybe the bear would have been uncomfortable enough to learn something. Since it was a young, small bear, it might have educated him and saved his life for a decade or so. But, then, maybe not. But my friend had walls between him and the bear and daylight outside, which gave him plenty of safety to decide what to do. A bear in the night while you're wrapped up in a sleeping bag inside a tent? That's a whole different scenario. Like this guy: http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=15821 Sorry. AFAIC, that guy wasted too much ammo (ie, >1 round) on warning shots. I'd have shot that sasquatch as sure as sin, then sat with my back against a rock wall until daylight and ready to shoot more of them. There is absolutely, positively no way I'm going out into the wilderness without at least two firearms: a rifle and a sidearm.

Back to the original question. NorthWind and I once investigated a sighting location at a lake camp. A (presumably) old sasquatch with a limp was seen dumpster diving numerous times. I'd guess scavenging, eating roadkill and pets kept outside would be much easier than taking a human. I would bet they have an idea, that if one of us goes missing, multitudes more will show up searching, which bodes ill for them. And, yes, I do think they are that intelligent.

Here's one time:

Well, then, the answer is clearly NO, and that has absolutely nothing to do whith critters. I'm proof of that. My many brushes with death were primarily the elements, not aggressive animals. Partners in the field can save your life.............but they can also shoot you accidentally, which happened to me as well. In fact, my trips into the Bush went primarily solo in the early 2000's because my partners became too dangerous, needy, or just plain intolerable, and I felt safer without them............until I damned near killed myself a few times. It's just dangerous out there, and sasquatches are the very least of my worries (except Alaska has no snakes, so I don't worry about them at all, and I'm very thankful).

I'm reducing travel, even to Anchorage, to only-if-necessary. Last winter, just hours after arriving in Vegas, I was in a situation where I had my hand on my weapon and was ready to shoot. The thugs drove away. Another very strange and suspicious character loitered nearby during and after this confrontation. Later, miles away in a rural area and right after bedding down in the motorhome, "somebody" started jiggling the door knob (turned out to be a cow licking the door knob). In both cases, I can't imagine feeling better about the situations with the equivalent of a bean bag round. Times are tense. I kinda' like it here. I think I'll just stay home until Mrs. Huntster forces the issue.

Those are a lot of questions to unpack. Any wild animal that is desperately trying to survive old age or serious injury would likely be dangerous to humans as without weapons we are the most helpless critters in the forest/jungle. (Except for pandas, of course. Seriously, google panda videos and ask yourself how these animals actually survive in the wild....) In going through old newspapers, I've run across several articles where tigers, elephants, bears, and wolves were said to hunt/injure humans out of "hate." As Silverback and Huntster state, yes, a wild animal (Bigfoot) is likely to act like other wild animals. As to the questions about whether certain national parks are dangerous and what specific cases involve, there is no end of information in threads such as the missing 411 thread at As to what kind of firearm (not necessarily a pistol) to carry in the backwoods, several members of the Forums who have extensive backwoods experience have offered opinions at this thread. Between the two threads, that's over 50 pages of discussion on most of the substance asked about. As to the "should people go out and do dumb things?" question, No. They shouldn't. But that didn't stop some guy from camping out with grizzlies because "they were used to him" or a New Jersey hiker from going up in the Adirondacks in shorts and a t-shirt without adequate food, warm clothing, and other survival stuff, and they both died even without help from Bigfoot.

http://www.world-builders.org/lessons/less/biomes/annutrita.html I estimate that a 800 lbs mammal is going to need roughly 8800 calories per day to maintain its body weight. A 400 lbs silverback gorilla eats roughly 40 lbs of vegetation (plus a small percentage of insect protein) per day. What would the caloric intake of say a family of 5 Sasquatch be per day? Approaching 50k right? Or in vegetation consumed terms it's right about (80 lbs or double gorilla daily intake X 5) 400 lbs per day per family troupe. Thats a lot of veggies. What if the troupe killed a whitetail deer? http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/calories/wild-game-whitetail-deer-venison-328430317 4 oz of meat equals 170 calories, so 1 lbs equals 680 calories. So a 200 lbs deer represents 136000 calories, not counting the loss of bone and or antler weight. 8800 cal X 5 equals 44000 calories. So a average sized deer represents roughly 3 days worth of meals for a family of five. Thats roughly 121 deer per year or 24333 lbs of annual meat consumed. Check my numbers guys..... In the Virunga range trackers follow mountain gorillas around by the swath of vegetational destruction they leave behind. These gorillas are like lawn mowers constantly moving along the mountain side. Family troupes up to 20 all feeding together. They also recieve some protein eating insects. Of course gorillas can forage all year long in Africa. North America is a different story is most regions minus some gulf states and west coast. So if your caching food stores all summer for the winter months? A conservative estimate minus spoilage and increased caloric winter need, would be doubling the daily 400 lbs of vegetation collected to 800 lbs per family. Gorillas spend 60 % of their day simply chewing their food. That doesn't leave a lot of time to sleep, mate, play, teach babes and collect food for winter months for a Bigfoot. Meat must play a heavy role in winter time. But the snow is crunchy, the background is white, the leaves have fallen. Not good ambushing. So they must either store plant material away or hibernate. But Apes don't hibernate that we are aware of. Anyhow just some crunching data in my mind tonight.

I would suggest a home range model with a nomadic cycle of following resources completely every 2 to 3 weeks ( obviously deviating enough down from lasting snow ) along box-canyons and or benches that follow streams and smaller river pathways. This area would be chosen based on the ability to remain hidden, thermoregulation and browsing/hunting along the way. My data indicates constant movement cycle within a territory, they seem to hang in an area for not much longer than 3 or 4 days ( there have been certain months in certain areas that are exception ) and they basically travel for a day to another resource area along a known routine and hang out for a few days and so on, eventually they follow this general path all the way back around to the starting line and repeat but constantly flexing the path ( within 1 or 2 miles of bandwidth outside of direction of intended travel ) according to need or human activity. This model prevents patterning by prey and humans, prevents over browsing and resource devastation, explains the indifference and frequency of road crossing reports and provides a schedule that allows for gauging future resources to avoid scarcity periods. I plan on doing a thread thoroughly explaining it all in-depth in the near future.

With the discovery Homo floresiensis twenty years ago, the logical connection to Orang Pendak is intriguing. Sightings continue to occur. If verification of Pendak were confirmed, it's difficult to imagine the ensuing uproar and pandemonium in the scientific community. Such a discovery could spur funding for further research into a possible N American great ape candidate.

I have not read all the posts up to this point but I think it is difficult to calculate pounds of material because the caloric density per gram can vary greatly. We also can't measure metabolic rate with Sasquatches necessarily as what you eat at what time can change the rate itself. In mammals the metabolic rate is effected by sun exposure, temperature, stress and sleep. Sasquatches do not seem to be pot-bellied ( fermentation gut adapted ) and seem to consume a lot of direct protein when compared to gorillas. I would say that they focus on nutrient dense food heavily in the fall and again in the spring, sources heavily would lean toward insects, small critters, nuts, tubers, salmon, ungulates, fruits, lichens, mushrooms and softer plant leaf material. Just a side note, I am very convinced that omegas are likely the most important need to the Sasquatch, big brains demand them and this would explain the continued historic references in native cultures that sasquatch can become fairly confrontational in situations such as pulling salmon nets and invading smoke houses. I have also noted that Sasquatch reports do often happen on a regular basis close to large tracts of masting nut trees. I suspect they target certain foods at certain times and try to conserve energy, the few long trackways on record seem to indicate very focused directional travel as if they have a point B in mind. If I had to guess with what little I know from reading, behavior and looking for feeding sites I would say someplace between 7500 to 1000 calories split between 30% fat, 30% carbs, and 40% protein averaged across the year cycle. That is my 2 cents and again I don't have a whole lot of confidence yet in my view here but it is where I am at, critics are welcome. It would be interesting to see what the metabolic consumption of the Chinese snub nosed monkey is throughout the year as a comparison as they have a wide range diet and endure some fairly cold conditions following the snowline.

RIP to another actual scientist who believed the Sasquatch species exists, and a good human.

As gun owners? We are all family here and should not be fighting amongst ourselves. Frisco’s statement reminds me of the Kehoe brothers shoot out with Ohio SP. No one was hit. It stands out because the Kehoe brothers were from north of Colville Wa. Brainwashed kids living in the woods. Either way real stress is tough to simulate. I was on the fire dept for 17 years and was a training officer and training certainly helps. But no one and I mean no one actually knows how they are gonna react in a life and death situation until it happens to them. Some get back in the saddle and some don’t.

Careful, Frisco85132, that's an attack on the poster, not on the argument.

Let’s leave the supernatural talk for the supernatural section please! Thanks! 👍

My response to the OP is based on 40+ years of wandering the Idaho woods, hunting, and carrying various firearms in the military and law enforcement. I am also a competitive shooter with plenty of trophies, own more guns than most local police departments, and regularly carry in the woods while doing Bigfoot research. My most often carried defensive arm is a Sig Sauer P365 9mm subcompact that holds 12 rounds. I am very accurate with it and it goes with me nearly every trip into town. When I am hiking in the mountains, then I am carrying a 10mm pistol. I have several of them, but most often I have my Springfield Armory XDM Elite OSP 10mm 3.8"... When in the woods, rarely do I also have a long gun if just hiking due to the extra weight. But, if camping or in an area where I suspect larger predators, then I will bring along my woods carbine. It's a Henry Black rifle in .45 Colt loaded with 300gr hard cast bullets going 1300 fps. It will take care of any critter I may come across. As to the subject of defending against Bigfoot... Physically, I think both of my woods carry firearms are adequate in terms of penetrating an 800+lb mammal enough to stop a threat. But... I think the majority of encounters have such a strong psychological component to them that makes the stopping power of whatever firearm the witness is holding pretty much irrelevant. I had a good friend of mine text me a few weeks ago and jokingly ask me what firearm would be adequate against a BF. She then asked if a firearm would even be an effective deterrent against a BF. And then she admitted she had just had a terrifying encounter while out jogging in the Oregon woods with a BF and was scared to go back into the woods. She spoke of the infrasound and mind-reading experience she had that made her think that even is she had a firearm, she wouldn't have been able to use it. Accordingly, I don't carry a firearm as a defense against Bigfoot, but as a tool to use for survival and possible defense against predators.

Well if one accepts the ridiculous notion that Bigfoot is a "woopernatural" space monkey....then I think one should also accept the notion that they would dematerialize/vibrate to a different frequency of matter/jump into a portal/float off on an orb, or simply allow the projectile(s) to pass through them ala Kitty Whatzername from X-Men long before a bullet, slug, or load of buckshot hit them, so the choice of caliber is moot. If, however, on the other hand, you are one who disregards the woopidity and accepts the very real possibility that they are, in fact, an apex predatory omnivore or an opportunistic omnivore with at least the ability to harvest mammal or pescatarian protein when it's convenient...then the possibility remains that they will ****** a hairless tool using ape such as a human if it is low risk high reward. As for a firearm, I carry a Glock 20 in 10mm with Buffalo Bore Big Game ammo when I am out in the field for ANY reason, whether I am hunting deer or fishing. Less because I think Bigfoot is going to prey on me, though I allow for the possibility, but more for the very real possibility that a black bear with a ****** attitude and general disposition may want to nibble on my ass. If "attacked" by a Bigfoot, the reality is that you're probably going to be dead before you knew an attack was coming because it's probably going to be from ambuscade and done by the Grand Master Gold Medalist Hide And Seek Champion of the world. BUT...the Ape Canyon account tells us that one was shot and fell into a gorge, and when the miners were allegedly attacked, they used their rifles and shotguns to drive the "Mountain Devils" away, so there is a presumption that guns DO have an effect on them and they won't "woo away on a moonbeam". Hell, even if you believe Justin Smeja killed not one, but two mind ya, TWO of them....then...the possibility that guns work on them like any other biological critter remains. Now, the bad news....the ONLY way that any firearm would be of ANY value is if you have at least a little warning, and even then, 99% of gun owners are barely competent to carry a gun and not shoot themselves in the foot on a range, let alone during an adrenaline dump facing a dangerous animal charge/attack. Over 27 years as a police officer having to review literally hundreds of videos of person to person gun fights from stores, etc....the probability of emptying your gun concurrently with your bladder and bowels are about the same while missing every shot. Sorry if the truth hurts...buuuuuut...there it is. Most people survive because they were the luckiest and least incompetent combatant. When in a dynamic critical incident, you will ALWAYS default to your level of training and as the extreme vast majority of gun owners don't get ANY training beyond MAYBE a hunter safety class, or a CCW class taught by Joe The Tactical Plumber, then the default will be "draw gun, **** pants, miss target, panic, empty magazine or cylinder, scream like a chick". Generally lifelong hunters who don't get "buck fever" are exempt from this, trained competitive shooters, or prior military with combat arms/deployment MOS are fairly stress inoculated too, but it also depends upon keeping up with training. I have been in several critical incidents during my career where other officers who were not "gun people" who placed a high value on training were next to useless in a gun fight, so I am not ******** on John Average Gun Carrier. I am ******** on other cops too. But....It's not ALL bad news even for the 99% who are a danger to their own feet in a high stress situation. Based upon not only my own face to face encounter were I am convinced that the revelation of my pistol is what caused the one I was staring at to flee, there have been other encounters where the BF/SQ took off when the presence of a firearm was discovered...so I believe, based upon this, that a visible firearm probably has a deterrent effect. So, if I were part of the 99%, I'd carry a 12 gauge shotgun or a big old hawg leg in a hip holster so it could be seen as a deterrent to a hungry, opportunistic BF/SQ.

Well, I hope that you come through the other side unscarred by the increased pressure! An old Army motivation poster (by an unknown artist) showed a guy getting squashed in a vice with limbs akimbo and bloodshot eyes bulging out and he's saying, "Go ahead, you SOB, tighten it some more!"

Moreover, those are a lot of assumptions and assertions to unpack, essentially none proven. We should never forget that though I think they are predators, omnivores, there are a number of people who would swear on their grandma's grave that BF are strict herbivores. If that's the case, then the whole question of predation is moot. Who presumes the right, or authority, to "ALLOW" **me** to go into the woods or not, alone? What fool presumes someone else has the right to dictate that to me .. or to anyone else? The whole notion of someone attempting that stupidity makes my blood boil.

The Wilks FH obituary

Jane Goodall was with Mary and Louis Leakey at Olduvai Gorge. She switched to behavior and studied apes and chimps and others. An amazing life.

I am currently filming and editing some projects, I will be adding some of our catalog here for discussion in the near future.

Sad news.

I'm pretty egalitarian in my choice of knives. I carry the same Camillus 6" Hunter I have had since I was 12 for a fixed blade. It holds a razor edge, has a full tang, and I figure I have known that knife for 45 years, skinned a lot of game with it, used it to baton a lot of kindling, and even lance a boil on my best friend's butt one time in Montana...I don't see a need to change. For a folder, I carry a 4.2" Spyderco that I carried for the last 15 years I was a cop, and a little two blade Victorinox Swiss Army knife and that's mostly for the tweezers and the toothpick.

I was a cop for 27 years. I carried, in one flavor or another, a Glock model of some sort/caliber depending upon the whims and tides of the agency. I started with a Glock 17 in 9mm in 1990, then the department became convinced that we needed 40 cal, so we went to the Glock 22 in 1994, then for what seemed to be about five minutes in the early 2000s we went to the Glock 21 in 45ACP..........then back to the Glock 17 in 9mm again. Ugh. That said, I trust the Glock platform 100% and have carried Glock on duty, off duty, shooting in multiple competition disciplines for over 35 years and now since I am retired from LE and a practicing attorney....I still carry a Glock 19 in 9mm. That said....in the woods, mountains, or desert....I carry a Glock Model 20 in 10mm with Buffalo Bore Hard Cast 200 grain TCFP. It screams out at 1300fps, penetrates deeply, and gives me 16 rounds on tap with a pair of 15 round magazines on my belt for very little weight cost versus ballistic payload, and weight is a consideration because of two knee and a hip replacement as the result of a line-of-duty injury. But, let's be clear....I don't carry to defend myself from a Sasquatch primarily....it's probably 10th down on my list. The reality is I am convinced that they are dangerous, but not aggressive unless you push the action and so I consider the likelihood of having to engage one to be incredibly remote just based on the number of interactions I have had (1 in 1993) compared to the thousands of hours I have spent in the woods, mountains, and desert over the decades. Add to that the credible interactions that others have had where no one had to shoot one. Ape Canyon notwithstanding, but let's face it Fred Beck shot one of them, so yeah...they's be pissed. I'm not convinced Justin Smeja shot one as he claimed, so I am not going to say he did or he didn't, only that I am not convinced he did. So, the reality is that I carry my 10mm as insurance against bear, mountain lion, feral dogs, wild hogs which I consider to be the most likely threat, and of course humans with bad intent. Looking back to 1993 when I had my face to face encounter, with decades of hindsight....the thought I had back then that I was going to have to defend myself from the Sasquatch was PROBABLY initiated by ME and my body language or a scent I gve off that caused a defensive posture reaction response in the creature. I had been a cop for 5 years by this time and my thinking was "threat focused" and "threat management" and "aggression response" and the stimuli of being face to face with something I didn't believe existed back then, or at least didn't believe was a "Michigan Thing" reset my brain clock in a microsecond and my whole reality changed. I am still nine out of ten toes in the "no kill" camp, and I sure as hell don't want to ever be forced to shoot one. I'd like to see another one, not just hear wood knocks and a couple of suspected vocalizations, and see some suspected prints...but just have that moment where I could experience it again and NOT be thinking "tactically" but more like "Okay, what can I learn?". Sorry for the long post. Once I got to typing, I got too lazy to stop.

From the FBI contemporaneous files - internal memo July 1969 'Park Officials have noted the attitude of Williams Martin has undergone marked change from time when he was frantically searching for his child and appreciative of all help rendered. He has increasingly come under the influence of visionaries, is unwilling to accept fact his child is dead, and prefers to believe child has been kidnaped and might yet be found alive'. This statement strikes me as being very callous and heartless. It does however, suggest that Mr Martin didn't 'always' maintain that his son was kidnapped, but entirely understandably, hung on to any hope he could find, which, as time went on and it was clear that he couldn't have survived alone in the wilderness for such length, latching on to the idea of kidnap. Again, there's no judgement here, I would almost certainly have done the same. Even if he had always believed that there was kidnap involved, a desperate father in emotional turmoil and probably blind panic likely isn't the best, most objective assessor of the situation. Trying to imagine how I would feel in his shoes, I certainly wouldn't trust my objective assessment of anything. Even then, if you do accept that he could think about it rationally and always believed it was a kidnapping, a belief, however strongly held, does not make it a fact. The fact is that there was never any credible information regarding a kidnapping. From the NPS chronology 'He [Bill Martin] quickly went west on the AT as far as Little Bald (Approximately 1 mile) and returned thinking Dennis might be back to the others. He then went west again on the AT to Russell Field, 2.5 miles, and returned to Spence Field.' I have no idea how long this might have taken him, but clearly Dennis hadn't gone west along the trail or his father would have found him. As such, we don't know where he went. But we do know that in the immediate aftermath, only the westbound trail was searched by his father. It seems from the chronology that, at least until Rangers arrived (some time after being notified at 8:28pm) only trails were searched. The first mention of searching the immediate area around where he was last seen comes with Rangers involved. The mention also comes after the first mentions of the heavy rainfall and mention that 'All streams were high and turbulent.' We know Dennis was off trail and looping around when last seen. Unless he got back on to a trail, no one was looking off trail until at least 8:30 in pouring rain and coming darkness. It was followed up on and the FBI didn't 'do nothing'. They visited the site with the witness. The timeframe is everything here. I've shown you, with sources quoted, that the scream happened at the same time, up to an hour before and certainly no later than an hour after Dennis went missing 90 minutes away. The FBI, with the Rangers, did what was necessary to conclusively establish that the encounter was completely unrelated to Dennis' disappearance and therefore not credible evidence of a kidnapping and therefore outside of the FBI's authority. You've provided no evidence or sources to suggest otherwise. No they don't, but plenty of forest animals make noises that could potentially be mistaken for a scream. Men who don't want to be seen or approached also have the potential to scream. There's simply no reason to believe that the scream was Dennis given that it would be impossible for him to be there, and you've provided nothing to suggest why it should be considered him. I absolutely agree that people were evicted to establish the park. Where you lose me is the leap that some haven't left, that the NPS/FBI would leap to the conclusion that they were child abductors, certainly responsible for a kidnapping (for which there is no evidence of kidnap anyway) and in collusion with the military, send in the Green Berets to take them out. Again, you've provided nothing to back up those huge assumptions and leaps in logic. I don't know why. I have given you quotes and sources for why they were included in this particular search. I've also suggested a logical answer to your question - that is that they weren't previously training in the local area at a time when a massive public SAR was happening and required the exact skills that the Green Berets had experience of and were currently training for. The NPS documents suggest improvements that could be made to SAR procedures, including using fewer searchers and concentrating on ones with specific knowledge of the area and tracking skills. 'could this have precluded using Green Berets in future? Again, I'm not stating that I know for certain, but it sure seems more likely than sending them in to take out mountain men or 'feral' humans in front of hundreds of potential civilian witnesses based on no evidence of wrongdoing. You're the one making an assertion that the official line is false and that there was another reason for the use of Green Berets, but you haven't provided anything to back it up. The FBI and NPS documents show that the 'Search admittedly was not absolute. This is extremely rugged terrain covered with heavy brush and woods and contains many deep crevices and sink holes.' As I have shown, the search covered 56 square miles by the end of the 9th day, meaning a search radius of 4.22 miles, not covered absolutely. I've also shown that with a speed of 1mph, by the time the co-ordinated search started on the morning after he went missing, Dennis could have been anywhere within a 450 square mile area. With a speed of 1mph, by the time the first Rangers and family started searching off trail that night, Dennis would have been at the outer edges of what was searched, but not absolutely, by the end of the 9th day. Any bear/cougar could have dragged him into an area not accessible for human searching, or outside the outer edges of what was searched. Your point also doesn't deal with the potential for accident, being washed away in those streams that were 'high and turbulent' even on that first night, or those sink holes, crevices and any other areas that couldn't be searched within, let alone without the search radius. You are stating things as a certainty, when they are absolutely not certain, then using that as a launchpad for a vague conspiracy that has no supporting facts and without providing any evidence or sources to back it up. This seems disingenuous to me. You say you have no dog in the fight, but keep repeating that the Harold Key encounter indicates something nefarious, in particular a kidnapping. You mentioned a 'mangy' human carrying something through the woods. I asserted that that was incorrect and provided quotes and reasoning, as well as showing how the encounter couldn't be relevant unless you accepted 411's false timeline. You didn't dispute my assertions or provide anything to disprove them but rather repeated the description of a mangy man carrying something through the woods that seems to be a Paulides fabrication, and use that fabrication as a reason to doubt the FBI assessment and thereby suggest some further conspiracy. You also mentioned Paulides in your first post on this thread and asserted on the 411 thread that he wasn't lying. You say that the case is well known 'because of the oddities associated with it' but on the 411 thread state that 'the fact still remains that without Paulides I would have no clue about Dennis Martin' and many of the oddities that you have listed and repeated are based on Paulides' untruths. My distrust of Paulides is not bias, it is a rational assessment of his reliability, or lack thereof, to accurately present the facts, some of which I have demonstrated in this thread, and which distrust is widely shared and proven elsewhere regarding this and other cases. I truly do not have a dog in the fight, I have satisfied myself of Paulides' unreliability and would be more than happy to discuss the case without any reference to him whatsoever. However, that is not possible until his inaccuracies are removed from the discussion, and at present, some of your arguments seem based on them, and you have provided no evidence or other sources to back up those arguments.

Mental illness is off the charts these days. Covid caused a lot of folks to just break, mentally. Before, everyone in a small town knew who the town crazy person was. Now, they have access to the internet so the whole world knows who the crazy person is. Pretty sure the OP is well known to his neighbors as the crazy person.

According to an article I read yesterday the U.S. annual tree harvest is between 3-6 billion trees a year depending on tree density per square mile. That's not board feet mind you. That's an actual whole-tree estimate. Your post sort of underscores the food competition thing. By extension it may also hint at a lower Sasquatch population.

MIB suggested that I chime in on this discussion. I've been busy with various pursuits for the last month or so. But I can now 'chime in'... Clarification on the bones is that yes we did find a single bone with both adult and juvenile teeth impressions on it. Other work we have done in the last year also supports the evidence of small family units. We have seen no evidence of large groups. What we have found also shows that when feeding on the meat of an animal, it is done in the location of the kill site. It has been suggested that there should be a swath showing their feeding behavior. In the case of this kind of feeding on meat, it is scattered and not necessarily easy to find. Just as the case is with any other animal kills. The thing is, if bigfoot exists, it has existed in the ecosystem for millenia. Most agree that it is an omnivore. So when we look for that so called swath of feeding behavior how do we know whether it was chipmunks, bears, coyotes or bigfoot that cleaned out that field of huckleberries. What turned all those rocks over looking for insects? Or tore apart those logs and stumps that you find throughout the forest? What browsed all the leaves off the salmonberries and blackberries along that forest edge? Elk, deer, rabbits or just maybe bigfoot? We have found evidence that they feed on larger animals. The argument here is not whether they killed them, although the possibility exists, because we have also found evidence of confiscation of cougar kills. It also appears to be seasonal, late winter and early spring; the lean times in the forest. Just as the aforementioned seasonal feeding of bears on moths. So their diet varies over the year. Some may think there are few animal kills in the forest. In one 30 acre clearcut we found 2 dead elk, a cow and later a calf, in one week's period of time. Both fresh kills. The cow was feed on by 2 bears and went from a whole elk to a pile of bones in three days. Nothing goes to waste in the wild. Within a mile of there was another fresh kill although I couldn't find that one. It was definitely there. The point is the evidence is there but are we able to differentiate and interpret what did it?

And? What's your point? If you read what I wrote, you would also see that I included LEOs in my statement. I speak from experience as a 27 year police veteran and actual shooter with over 30 years in USPSA, IDPA, ISPC, 3Gun, and PPC. Armorer, custom gun builder and trainer at not one, but two academies. So, I am not speaking from inexperience or ignorance. Yay, you got to put your two cents in. Add another five bucks and you can get yourself a latte...but the fact remains that the extreme vast majority of gun owners are woefully ignorant of their safe handling, let alone competent to mount a defense in a dynamic critical incident. I am 110% PRO 2A and don't even believe any state or municipality has the authority to regulate ownership or carry...in a free society the burden lies on the citizen, but the fact remains that people simply make the choice NOT to get training, choose NOT to practice what they learned in training, and make the choice NOT to gain any level of competence. How many post critical incident videos have you had to professionally evaluate for either prosecution or defense? How many dynamic critical incidents have YOU been involved in? How many times have you had to sit through tens of dozens of hours of post critical incident testimony or deposition? How many times have you sat in a courtroom as an expert witness, or as a consulting attorney for other attorneys in self defense cases? And finally, how many books have YOU written on self defense law, techniques, and post critical incident survival that have been court recognized and accepted? (For me, so far it's TWO of those). How many CLEs (Continuing Legal Education) have YOU written and delivered to other attorneys after you retired from LE and went to law school? (For me....nearly a dozen written with ten times that delivered). So yay....you ran a gun shop. Good goobledy goo for you, but don't pretend doing your chicken dance from behind a retail counter and not on the range or in a courtroom and dropping a faux anecdote about poorly maintained weapons coming from LEOs is anything less than mouth waddling because of personal hubris.

WELCOME TO THE FORUM AND MELLOW OUT........WE CAN ACCEPT YOU THEN. WE ARE BIGFOOTERS SO LIGHTEN UP ON THE POLICE AND ATTORNEY EXPERIENCE.And? What's your point? If you read what I wrote, you would also see that I LEOs in my statement. I speak from experience as a 27 year police veteran and actual shooter with over 30 years in USPSA, IDPA, ISPC, 3Gun, and PPC. Armorer, custom gun builder and trainer at not one, but two academies. So, I am not speaking from inexperience or ignorance. BUT YOU ARE TURNING OFF YOUR AUDIENCE BY BEING OVER BERING.........SETTLE DOWN AND WE WILL LISTEN TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE. GET SOME LORAZAPAMS BY PERSCRIPTION. Yay, you got to put your two cents in. Add another five bucks and you can get yourself a latte...but the fact remains that the extreme vast majority of gun owners are woefully ignorant of their safe handling, let alone competent to mount a defense in a dynamic critical incident. AGREED I am 110% PRO 2A and don't even believe any state or municipality has the authority to regulate ownership or carry...in a free society the burden lies on the citizen, but the fact remains that people simply make the choice NOT to get training, choose NOT to practice what they learned in training, and make the choice NOT to gain any level of competence. THE AVERAGE PERSON SHOULD BE PROFICIENT WITH A 38 REVOLVER TO PROTECT THE HOME. I WENT THROUGH MARINE CORPS TRAINING BY RETURNING BY COMBAT HARDENED MARINES. REWRITE THIS PARAGRAPH IN A LESS CONDENSENDING MANNER. How many post critical incident videos have you had to professionally evaluate for either prosecution or defense? How many dynamic critical incidents have YOU been involved in? RATHER THAN PUTTING THE MAN DOWN........................... TELL US OF THE "DYNAMIC CRITICAL INCIDENTS" THAT YOU HAVE BEEN IN. WE CAN ALL LEARN THEN. How many times have you had to sit through tens of dozens of hours of post critical incident testimony or deposition? How many times have you sat in a courtroom as an expert witness, or as a consulting attorney for other attorneys in self defense cases? GIVE EXAMPLES And finally, how many books have YOU written on self defense law, techniques, and post critical incident survival that have been court recognized and accepted? (For me, so far it's TWO of those). How many CLEs (Continuing Legal Education) have YOU written and delivered to other attorneys after you retired from LE and went to law school? (For me....nearly a dozen written with ten times that delivered). So yay....you ran a gun shop. Good goobledy goo for you, but don't pretend doing your chicken dance from behind a retail counter and not on the range or in a courtroom and dropping a faux anecdote about poorly maintained weapons coming from LEOs is anything less than mouth waddling because of personal hubris.YOU HAVE TAUGHT LITTLE TO THOSE WHO NEED TO KNOW. THANKS FOR TRYING, MELLOW OUT, AND WHILE STEPPING WATCH FOR TOES.